The Post General Election Thread

[malg]

I would imagine a well respected economist who agrees with the austerity measures could come up with a good response, however, not many respected economists post on here......

 

[worsleyweb]

What about rascal ? And pb?

 

[Rascal]

The Guardian wants increases in public spending - and that means tax rises.

Those tax rises would mostly end up as pay rises for Guardian reading public sector workers, so alleviating the very small amount of austerity those people have suffered compared to most workers.

For the rest of us those tax rises would means austerity gets worse.

You did not understand what Krugman said then?

Do you realise that in times such as these Keynes advocated tax cuts to help drive growth. Where or why you imagine that what he is saying means tax rises is just beyond me.

 

[Rascal]

I would imagine a well respected economist who agrees with the austerity measures could come up with a good response, however, not many respected economists post on here......

What about rascal ? And pb?

Why would I argue against Krugman. I have argued on here for the last few years on the points that he makes. Austerity is needless and it is lie made to the UK electorate so that the Government can shrink the state. Austerity is not an Economic neccesity as Krugman agrues it is a Political standpoint. You will not find anybody in the Government who would admit to it though.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

If anyone can actually come up with a proper response as to why Krugman is wrong I'd love to read it. But I guess I won't be reading it from you.

You won't be reading it full stop. There is a good case for reducing and eliminating a structural deficit, where current account spending is consistently higher than receipts. But there is no rational case for cuts on the scale we saw in the first half of the last parliament and are likely to see in this one. That's why all you get is sarcasm from the RWNJ's.

Patrick Minford, the darling of the economic right and Thatcher's staunchest economic ally, unsurprisingly argues that you need deep, systemic cuts in government spending. But even he insists you can only do that alongside huge tax cut whereas this government has actually raised the total tax take. So even the doyen of monetarism doesn't think you can cut one side of the equation without cutting the other.

 

[Rascal]

Patrick Minford, the darling of the economic right and Thatcher's staunchest economic ally, unsurprisingly argues that you need deep, systemic cuts in government spending. But even he insists you can only do that alongside huge tax cut whereas this government has actually raised the total tax take. So even the doyen of monetarism doesn't think you can cut one side of the equation without cutting the other.

Minford is a proper nutjob. I attended an Economics seminar with him as a guest speaker and i can confirm he is a fucking fruitcake.

He did confirm to me that Keynesian economics is a better school of thought.

 

[kas_tippler]

Krugman?

 

[SWP's back]

I read that crock of shit last week - the guardian. Need I say more.

The lefty Daily Mail. And they are proud of it funnily enough.

 

[SWP's back]

Why would I argue against Krugman. I have argued on here for the last few years on the points that he makes. Austerity is needless and it is lie made to the UK electorate so that the Government can shrink the state. Austerity is not an Economic neccesity as Krugman agrues it is a Political standpoint. You will not find anybody in the Government who would admit to it though.

Plenty of the electorate know there is no need for austerity. Doesn't mean we don't want it.

 

[mackenzie]

Plenty of the electorate know there is no need for austerity. Doesn't mean we don't want it.

Who is the 'we' in this?